Conciliation



   “Conciliation is a less frequently used form of ADR, and can be described as similar to
   mediation. The Conciliator's role is to guide the parties to a settlement.“

   

   Conciliation is another dispute resolution process that involves building a positive
   relationship between the parties of dispute, however, it is fundamentally different than
   mediation and arbitration in several respects.

   Conciliation is a method employed in civil law countries, like Italy, and is a more common
   concept there than is mediation.

   The “conciliator” is an impartial person that assists the parties by driving their
   negotiations and directing them towards a satisfactory agreement. It is unlike arbitration in
   that conciliation is a much less adversarial proceeding; it seeks to identify a right that has
   been violated and searches to find the optimal solution.

   Conciliation tries to individualize the optimal solution and direct parties towards a
   satisfactory common agreement. Although this sounds strikingly similar to mediation, there are
   important differences between the two methods of dispute resolution.

   In conciliation, the conciliator plays a relatively direct role in the actual resolution of a
   dispute and even advises the parties on certain solutions by making proposals for settlement.
   In conciliation, the neutral is usually seen as an authority figure who is responsible for the
   figuring out the best solution for the parties. The conciliator, not the parties, often
   develops and proposes the terms of settlement. The parties come to the conciliator seeking
   guidance and the parties make decisions about proposals made by conciliators. In this regard,
   the role of a conciliator is distinct from the role of a mediator. The mediator at all times
   maintains his or her neutrality and impartiality. A mediator does not focus only on
   traditional notions of fault and a mediator does not assume sole responsibility for generating
   solutions. Instead, a mediator works together with the parties as a partner to assist them in
   finding the best solution to further their interests. A mediator’s priority is to facilitate
   the parties’ own discussion and representation of their own interests, and guide them to their
   own suitable solution- a good common solution that is fair, durable, and workable. The parties
   play an active role in mediation, identifying interests, suggesting possible solutions, and
   making decisions concerning proposals made by other parties. The parties come to mediator
   seeking help in finding their own best solution.

   Also the role of the attorneys is different in mediation. Attorneys are more active in
   mediation in generating and developing innovative solutions for settlement. In conciliation,
   they generally offer advice and guidance to clients about proposals made by conciliators.

   Conciliation and mediation both look to maintain an existing business relationship and to
   rekindle a lost balance of power between two parties. These concepts are sometimes used as
   synonyms, but they do indeed vary substantially in their procedures. In mediation, the
   mediator controls the process through different and specific stages: introduction, joint
   session, caucus, and agreement, while the parties control the outcome. By contrast, in
   conciliation the conciliator may not follow a structured process, instead administering the
   conciliation process as a traditional negotiation, which may take different forms depending on
   the case.

   Conciliation is used almost preventively, as soon as a dispute or misunderstanding surfaces: a
   conciliator pushes to stop a substantial conflict from developing. Mediation is closer to
   arbitration in the respect that it ”intervenes” in a substantial dispute that has already
   surfaced that is very difficult to resolve without "professional" assistance. The parties
   approach mediation as an alternative method to resolve their dispute, due to the fact that
   they both recognize that the conflict has grown potentially serious enough for litigation.
   Mediation may be used, however, any time after the emergence of a dispute, including the early
   stages.